ABSTRACT
The doctrines and values of the 'new' archaeology are in the process of being broken down; for many they were never acceptable. Books such as Hodder's Symbols in Action (1982b), The Evolution of Social Systems (Friedman and Rowlands (eds,) 1978), Symbolic and Structural Archaeology (Hodder (ed.) 1982), and Ideology, Power and Prehistory (Miller and Tilley (eds.) 1984) have demonstrated the value and importance of fresh research orientations for the analysis of the relationship between social practices and material culture patterning. Many archaeologists may very well be persuaded that the kinds of studies undertaken in these works do represent a significant and important departure from the kinds of research characterizing the new archaeology while still remaining unclear as to the kinds of knowledge claims being advanced. It is the case that no systematic evaluation has been made of the epistemological and methodological basis underlying a non-positivist and non-functionalist archaeology. Similarly, criticisms of the new archaeology have been largely confined to demonstrating the inadequacy of specific approaches such as systems theory or ecological frameworks for the understanding of the past. Metatheoretical issues of fundamental importance, for example the relationship of theory to data and the idea of value-freedom, have hardly been touched upon.
